FROM PRIVATISATION TO

CORPORATISATION-A
Strategic Shift in Neoliberal
Policy: Lessons from KG-Gas
Basin, Singur and Nandigram


2




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


INTRODUCTION:
In 1991 India met with an economic crisis relating to its external debt the government
was not able to make repayments on its borrowings from abroad, foreign exchange reserves,
which we generally maintain to import petrol and other important items, dropped to levels that
were not sufficient for even a fortnight. The crisis was further compounded by rising prices of
essential goods. All these led the government to introduce a new set of policy measures which
are long term measures, aimed at improving the efficiency of the economy and increasing its
international competitiveness by removing the rigidities in various segments of the Indian
economy. The government initiated a variety of policies which fall under three heads that is
liberalization, privatization and globalization.
The rules and laws which were aimed at regulating the economic activities became major
hindrances in growth and development. Liberalization was introduced to put an end to these
restrictions and open up various sectors of the economy. Though a few liberalization measures
were introduced in 1980s in areas of industrial licensing, export and import policy, technology
upgradation, fiscal policy and foreign investment. The globalization aims at turning the world
into one whole or creating a borderless world. It also aims at transforming the world towards
greater interdependence and integration. It involves creation of networks and activities
integrating economic, social and geographical boundaries. (NCERT)
Privatization is the process of transferring ownership of a business, enterprise, agency,
public service, or public property from the public sector or government to the private sector.
Otherwise to a business that operates for a profit or for a nonprofit organization. It may also
mean government outsourcing of services or functions to private firms, e.g. revenue collection,
law enforcement, and prison management.

It also implies shedding of the ownership or
management of a government owned enterprise. The government companies are converted into
private companies in two ways (i) by withdrawal of the government from ownership and
management of public sector companies and or (ii) by outright sale of public sector companies.
3




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Privatization of public sector undertakings is disinvestment. The purpose of this sale of
government was mainly to improve financial discipline and facilitate modernization.
Corporatization is a precursor to partial or full privatization, which involves a process
where formerly public functions and public enterprises are sold to private business entities by
listing their shares on publicly traded stock exchanges. Corporatization is the process of
transforming state assets, government agencies or municipal organizations into corporations. It
refers to a restructuring of government and public organizations into joint-stock, publicly listed
companies in order to introduce corporate and business management techniques to their
administration. The result of corporatization is the creation of state-owned corporations where
the government retains a majority ownership of the corporation's stock. These structural reforms
we call it as Neo liberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support economic
liberalizations, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and enhancing the role of
the private sector in modern society.


This case examines the transference from privatization to corporatization. It also talks
about the various scams and cases such as Krishna Godavari basin, Coal Allocation Scam, 2G
spectrum, Singur and Nandigram etc and certain lessons from it. The Krishna and Godavari basin
oil scam is related with Reliance Industries Ltd, for the violation of the terms of its contract in
exploring gas fields in the Krishna-Godavari Basin.
The Nano Singur Controversy refers to the controversy generated by land acquisition of
the proposed Nano factory of Tata Motors at Singur in Hooghly district, West Bengal, India. The
Nandigram violence was an incident in Nandigram in the West Bengal state of India. The police
opened fire on villagers protesting against a special economic zone (SEZ) on March 14, 2007.
The Nandigram SEZ project was a joint venture between Indonesians Salim group and west
Bengal industrial development corporation. About fourteen of the villagers were killed in the
clash with the local police.
4




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


2G spectrum scam was a scam which involves politicians and government officials in
India illegally undercharging mobile telephony companies for frequency allocation licenses,
which they would then use to create 2G spectrum subscriptions for cell phones. Coal allocation
scam or Coalgate, is a political scandal concerning the Indian government's allocation of the
nation's coal deposits to public sector entities and private companies by Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh. (wikipedia, 2007)
FROM PRIVATISATION TO CORPORATISATION:
Privatization and corporatization are basically two different terms. In order to understand
the approach of the government it is very much necessary to have a thorough understanding of
both the terms. The corporatization and privatization are both considered to be distinctive
processes having advantages and drawbacks of their own.
Privatization also spelled as privatization generally refers to the transfer of government
owned services to private hands. The services might be a business, an enterprise, agency or a
public property. The private enterprise might be a profit or non-profit organization. The term also
has similarity with outsourcing of services or functions to private firms. (Wikipedia, 2014)
After a service or enterprise is privatized two things can happen. The whole of the
business might be taken over by single or more private companies making it completely private.
In such cases the company becomes a private equity. Other thing which can happen is that
certain proportion of the equity may be owned by the government and the other portion by the
private party making it a joint stock company. (Investopedia, 2014)
Generally it is believed that privatization of the services increases its effectiveness and
efficiency. But, without proper competition in the private sector it cannot be achieved. In most of
the countries, privatization has not been able to expectations of the public. It is because the lack
of competition in the private sector has always been evident. The private enterprises have always
taken advantage of the situations and tried to skim out the profits whenever some major project
has been given to them. This is true for most of the big enterprises all around the world. But in
5




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


the developing countries this theory has been more prominent. Take the example of the Krishna
Godavari Basin Scam in India. It is a perfect example of the inefficiency from the private party
due to lack of competition in the sector. The most of the blocks of this scam were allocated to the
Reliance Group for cheaper rates and it was believed that the project would be able to produce
oil and natural gas effectively and efficiently which will in turn help to meet the requirement of
oil and natural gas in the country. But, due to the takeover by a single organization this
effectiveness could not be achieved and the consequences have led to a high price of petrol
which has been made up to four times of the proposed rate and discussions are going on
regarding doubling of the current rate.
So, in order to counter the problems faced due to privatization of the government assets a
new game plan called corporatization has been introduced by the governments all around the
world. Corporatization is nothing but the conversion of national agencies or organizations or
municipal corporations into corporations. It refers to a restructuring of government and public
organizations into joint-stock, publicly listed companies in order to introduce corporate and
business management techniques to their administration. The result of corporatization is the
creation of state-owned corporations where the government retains a majority ownership of the
corporation's stock. However, in many cases, corporatization is a precursor to partial or full
privatization, which involves a process where formerly public functions and public enterprises
are sold to private business entities by listing their shares on publicly traded stock exchanges.
(Wikipedia, 2014) (Investopedia, 2014)
The advantages of corporatization are that the functioning of the organization becomes
structured and so, the efficiency is increased considerably. Also, due to the proper allocation of
delegation and hierarchy of management the working becomes smooth and a lot of conflicts can
be avoided.
HISTORY:
6




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Extensive deltaic plain formed by two large east coast rivers, Krishna and Godavari in the
state of Andhra Pradesh and the adjoining areas of Bay of Bengal in which these rivers discharge
their water is known as Krishna Godavari Basin. The Krishna Godavari Basin is a proven
petroliferous basin of continental margin located on the east coast of India .Its on land part
covers an area of 15000 sq. km and the offshore part covers an area of 25,000 sq. km up to 1000
m isobaths. The basin contains about 5 km thick sediments with several cycles of deposition,
ranging in age from Late Carboniferous to Pleistocene.
The major geomorphologic units of the Krishna Godavari basin are Upland plains,
Coastal plains, Recent Flood and Delta Plains.
The climate is hot and humid with temperature reaching up to 42 degree symbol is to be
inserted C during summer. The mean day temperature varies between 35 C and 40 C during
summer and 25 C and 30 C during winter.
More than 225 prospects have been probed by drilling of more than 557 exploratory
wells. Hydrocarbon accumulations have been proven in 75 of these prospects (22 oil & 53 gas).
Notable oil discoveries are Kaikalur, Vadali, Mori, Bantumilli, Lingala, Suryaraopeta,
Gopavaram, Kesanapalli, and Kesanapalli West. The gas discoveries are Adavipalem,
Elamanchili, Enugupalli, Narsapur, Razole, Tatipaka-Kadali, Pasarlapudi, Mandapeta,
Chintalapalli, Nandigama, Endamuru, Penumadam, Ponnamanda, Achanta, Mullikipalle,
Magatapalli, Gokarnapuram, Kesavadasapalem, Lakshamaneshwaram, Rangapuram and
Sirikattapalli.
In onshore, so far 141 prospects have been probed by 375 exploratory wells by ONGC,
out of which 11 oil & gas pools and 31 gas pools have been discovered and most of them are on
production. In offshore, so far more than 84 prospects have been probed by 182 exploratory
wells. Hydrocarbon accumulations have been proved in 33 of these prospects (11 oil & gas and
22 gas prospects). About nineteen discoveries have been made by Pvt./JV companies so far in
NELP blocks (Fifteen Dhirubhai discoveries by RIL in blocks KG-DWN-98/3 and KG-OSN-
7




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


2001/2, three discoveries by Cairn Energy Pty. Ltd. (CEIL) in block KG-DWN-98/2 within Mio-
Pliocene, 3 discovery by ONGC in the block KG-DWN-98/2 within Plio-Pleistocene sandstone
of Godavari formation and one discovery by GSPC in block KG-OSN-2001/3 within Lower
Cretaceous). (Directorate General of Hydrocarbons, 2011)
BASIN INTRODUCTION:
Krishna-Godavari Basin is a peri-cratonic passive margin basin in India. It is spread
across more than 50,000 square kilometers in the Krishna River and Godavari River basins
in Andhra Pradesh. The site is known for the D-6 block where Reliance Industries discovered the
biggest natural gas reserves in India in 2002. It was also the world's largest gas discovery of
2002. The total project is expected to cost $100 billion. Krishna Godavari basin is 50 km off the
coast of Kakinda.



Discoveries of Natural Gas Reserves:
The first gas discovery in the basin was in 1983, in Rajole Well No.1, when ONGC had a
small office in Rajahmundry and Narsapur. Since that discovery Reliance and others have joined
the exploration effort.
14 trillion cubic feet of gas by Reliance Industries in KG-DWN-98/l (KG-D6) in
2006. 6000 feet below the sea floor.
20 trillion cubic feet (5.710
11
m
3
)cubic feet of gas by Gujarat State Petroleum
Corporation in June 2005.
8




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Potentially 20 trillion cubic feet (5.710
11
m
3
) of gas in place at D-3 and D-9 blocks, as
estimated in May 2011. According to Reliance Industries "This includes identified
prospects and leads and a number of postulated prospects based on the play area and field
size distribution."
A gas discovery by ONGC in June 2009, which an anonymous company official said
could have an estimated 10 trillion cubic feet (2.810
11
m
3
). (Wikipedia).
New Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP)
Under this policy, government auctioned potential oil and gas field areas to private
players such as Reliance, Cairn etc.
These companies would take all risk of discovering the oil/gas, drilling it out and sell to make
profit.
Conventional Mining and Royalty:
If you are involved in Iron-ore mining, the Indian Bureau of Mines ( IBM) will determine
its present market value and you have to pay 10% royalty of that, to the Government.
For example you dig 1 kilo (!) iron ore, its present market-value is Rs.100, youve to give
Rs.10 as royalty
It does not matter how much profit you make out of this, youve to pay 10% right from
the day one of your mining activity.
But for the gas-exploration, the system of royalty is different, it is called Production
Sharing Contract.
Production Sharing Contract (PSC):
9




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


But here in case of gas, first youve to do Exploration. It may happen that you drill in a
potential area but still do not find any gas, and yet youve to purchase expensive drilling
instruments, vehicles, hire engineers and monthly salary to staff etc.
So there is a gestation period involved, before you actually discover the gas, start
selling it, recover your costs and then see the profits.
If there is a direct royalty sharing formulas like conventional iron-ore mining, then
private players will not be interested in taking the risk in this gas exploration activity.
Hence government came up with a concept called Production Sharing Contract (PSC).
Under this scheme, the company will have to share royalty, according to the profit made.
Initially company makes low profit, government gets extremely low share, later company
discovers more and more gas fields, its production increases and costs go down, then it
has to share more profit to the government.
This is not the standard royalty model as seen in mining systems, where revenue is shared
regardless of profitability. This PSC model allows the operator (RIL) to substantially
recover his costs before the sharing of revenue.
However, once these costs are recovered, the sharing with the government is often large.
But As you can understand Private contractors (RIL) have virtually no incentive to
minimize capital expenditure and a substantial incentive to increase capital expenditure
(theyll buy more and more vehicles, machines etc) to keep their operation-cost high,
which would result in low/lowest share of profit for the government of India.
Dateline of Reliance KG Basin Controversy:
1999 Vajpayee Government introduced NELP (New exploration licensing policy).
10




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


2000 Reliance got the license to explore gas in Krishna Godavari Basin.
2002 Reliance Industries discovered huge reserves of natural gas and some small
reserves of crude oil in a block called D6.
2007 CAG starts auditing.
2011 CAG submits audit report and media starts reporting this controversy.
(KmHouseIndia)
Overview of CAG Report:
Why Our Government has not appointed ONGC Chairman from 6 Months, why only
acting chairman? Answer is only to prefer RIL GAS DEAL.
Draft Report (20102011), the Comptroller and Auditor General of Indias (CAG) first
ever audit of oil and gas companies operating in India, said that the Government of India unduly
favored private oil and natural gas explorers including the Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance
Industries Ltd incurring a huge loss to the exchequer. The CAG report mentioned that the
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MOP&NG) and its regulatory arm the Directorate
General of Hydrocarbons (DGH) allegedly favored at least three private oil and natural gas
explorers. The report alleges that the government allowed Ambanis Reliance Industries Ltd
(RIL) to violate terms of its contract with the government for exploration in the Krishna-
Godavari basin (KG-D6). Allegedly, 70% of the draft Comptroller and Auditor General of India
report is devoted to Reliance Industries Ltd alone.
The CAG sent its Draft Report to the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MOP&NG)
on June 8, 2011. The CAG report also noted that former Directorate General of Hydrocarbons
(DGH) permitted Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) to inflate its development costs on extracting the
gas in the D6 block to the KG basin (KG-D6) from USD $2.47 billion to a huge USD $ 8.84
billion. The CAG also cited a joint venture of RIL with British Gas(BG) and Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation(ONGC) for hiking development costs in the Panna-Mukta and Tapti gas fields. It
has been earlier been alleged that an Empowered Group of Ministers had allowed Reliance
11




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Industries Ltd to sell per unit of the gas at a price of INR Rs. 4.20 even as the government
companies were selling the same for just INR Rs. 1.20.
In 2009 senior Income Tax officials in its report warned the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) of India, of a nexus between Reliance Industries Ltd and bureaucrats in the
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MOP&NG).The CBI was alerted in this report to the
possibility that Reliance Industries Ltd had bought a house for (Vinod Kumar Sibal) V K Sibal,
Head of the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons (DGH), the technical arm of the Ministry of
Petroleum that supervises licenses and permissions for private operators.
In response, on the 7th of October, 2009, the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons
(DGH), through full-page advertisements, said that the capital expenditure at RILs KG-D6 field
had gone up from USD $ 2.47 billion to USD $ 8.8 billion due to a three-fold rise in plant
capacity, doubling of output, 16 additional wells and a host of other facilities.
Vinod Kumar Sibal is related to Kapil Sibal, Minister of Human Resource Development
and Minister of Communications and Information Technology. On the 1st of July, 2011, in the
registration of a formal case of corruption against V K Sibal, former DGH, the CBI also
mentioned a Houston-based company GX Technology (GXT) and its Indian representative
Sujata Venkatraman, for showering favours on V K Sibal and his family members. It had been
alleged that the entire cost incurred by Sonia Sibal, the former DGHs younger daughter, in
completing a hotel management course from one of the prestigious institutes of Switzerland was
borne by Sujata Venkatraman of GX Technology (GXT).
On the 24th of June, 2011, Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) Chairperson Mukesh Ambani
met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh amid accusations of his company increasing capital
expenditure and violating terms of contracts with the Government of India. Ambani met the PM
in the wake of the Draft Report from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) that had
alleged that RIL received favors from the Ministry of Petroleum and Directorate General of
12




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Hydrocarbons, the regulator for oil hunting companies. RIL had also obtained portions of the
CAG Draft Report after it made a request to the Ministry of Petroleum.
In October, 2009, CBI had initiated a probe against V K Sibal on allegations that he had
received favors from Mukesh Ambani-owned Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) for approving a
near four-fold hike to $8.8 billion in expenditure for gas field. Official sources in the CBI said a
reference had been received from the Central Vigilance Commission(CVC) in this regard and the
agency would look into it. The then CVC Secretary K.S. Ramasubban had on October 1, 2009,
written to the then CBI Director Ashwani Kumar seeking discreet field verification on
the allegations of RIL purchasing flats in Mumbai for Mr. Sibals daughter and incurring
expenses over purchase of consumer durables for her. It is alleged that Sibal favored RIL and
approved a phenomenal increase in the capital expenditure from $2.4 billion to $8.8 billion for
KG D6 field between September and December 2006 in lieu of personal favors services from
RIL Group of Industries, said CBIs PE no 6(A)/2009 filed by its Anti-Corruption Unit.
(Myeconomist, 2011)
According to CAG report Oil Ministry and its technical arm, the Directorate General of
Hydrocarbons, did not pay adequate attention to protecting the governments financial
interest.CAG said in a report that Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) had breached some terms of a
production-sharing contract (PSC) with the government for one of its more lucrative blocks, and
blamed the petroleum ministry and one of its arms for their failure to provide adequate oversight
of the process.
A CAG report released in 2011 (initiated in 2007 but delayed due to non-co-operation) on
Performance Audit of Hydrocarbon PSCs castigated the oil ministry along with Reliance to
retain its entire KG-D6 block in contravention of the PSC. As per the PSC, Reliance should have
relinquished 25 per cent of the total area outside the discoveries in 2004 and 2005, but the entire
area was declared as a discovery area (after initial objections) and the company was allowed to
retain it. Without drilling adequate wells, Reliance kept on claiming that there was potential for
petroleum. In CAGs words this was done to confuse potential/prospectively with actual
13




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


discovery of hydrocarbons. The move allowed Reliance to keep the entire area to itself without
following the norms laid under the PSC.
In a recent report CAG has said that Reliance moved directly from discovery to
commercial production, skipping the intermediate appraisal program step required as under PSC.
CAG asks, without an appraisal program how did the government and DGH ascertain the amount
of gas in the well? CAG also said the current PSC template encouraged companies to front-load
expenditure as it correspondingly reduced the share of the government in the profit.CAG has
begun examining the books of Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) to see whether there was any loss to
the exchequer at the companys D6 block in the Krishna-Godavari (KG) basin in 2008-09 and
2009-10. This follows its review of the block until the 2007-08 fiscal year, which didnt contain
references to the so-called gold plating as production, and therefore, revenue from the KG-
DWN-98/3 block started in 2009. CAG, however, did point out in the earlier report that RIL had
declined to share information that would have enabled the auditor to critically examine the
justification of the company for cost escalations. (www.myeconomist.wordpress.com, 2012)
Criticism by Arvind Kejriwal:
Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal has ordered the anti-corruption arm of the Delhi
government to register first information reports (FIR) against Reliance Industries Ltds (RILs)
chairman Mukesh Ambani, Union oil and natural gas minister M. Veerappa Moily and former
minister Murli Deora, among others.
Kejriwal accused RIL of conspiring with some members of the government to create an
artificial shortage of gas in the country and raise prices of gas produced in the Krishna-Godavari
basin.
Moily rejected Kejriwals allegations, saying price fixing of petroleum products is done
as per expert advice. Delhi government has asked anti-corruption department to register cases
against Murli Deora, M. Veerappa Moily, Mukesh Ambani and others on gas-pricing issue. Case
14




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


will also be registered against Reliance Industries, and former DG (director general),
hydrocarbons, V.K. Sibal, Kejriwal said.
RIL had initially agreed to supply gas to state-owned utility NTPC Ltd at about $2.3 per
million British thermal units (mmBtu) for about 17 years, Kejriwal said. But the price of gas
from the D6 block of the Krishna-Godavari basin was fixed at $4.2 per mmBtu when Deora was
oil minister.
In 2012, after Moily took over as oil minister, the government agreed to link prices with
global indexes, which could double the local gas prices from 1st April 2013 . Kejriwal said he
would ask the government to suspend the latest order on gas pricing pending an inquiry.
Kejriwal, whose party came to power in Delhi in December, caught public attention with
an anti-corruption plankfirst with a nationwide anti-graft agitation with veteran activist Anna
Hazare and later with his newly formed Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
This is not the first time that Kejriwal has targeted RIL and Ambani. In November 2012,
Kejriwal alleged that RIL had used its influence to strike favorable terms for itself in its block in
the Krishna-Godavari basin off the Andhra Pradesh coast. In the same month, Kejriwal, who was
then working under the banner of India Against Corruption, alleged that Ambani hadRs.100crore
stashed in bank accounts in Geneva. RIL categorically denied both the allegations. (Arvind
Kejriwal targets RILs Mukesh Ambani, orders FIR on gas pricing, 2012)
HISTORY OF SINGUR CASE:
Singur, a village in West Bengal, gained worldwide attention when Tata Motors started
the construction of manufacturing plant of Tata Nano there. For the plant, the State government
of West Bengal conducted an eminent domain takeover of 997 acres of land using the 1894 land
acquisition act. Six sites were offered for the construction of the plant from which the company
selected Singur. Several farmers were displaced due to this project and it faced massive
opposition from them. The annual lease rent was fixed at Rs 1crore for the first five years, an
15




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


increase of 25% every five years from the 6th to the 30th year, a 30% rise every 10 years from
the 31st to the 60th year and flat Rs 20crore from the 61st to the 90th year.
The ultra-left parties, activists and left leaning intellectuals and the main opposition party
in the province Trinamul Congress (TMC) criticized the government in West Bengal for their
dealings with the Tata Company. They saw the land acquisition from the people through the
application of the eminent domain act as a violation not only of democracy but also of Marxist
ideals. The iconic figure of the peasant also became equally charged with meanings that signified
the authentic, local natural and son of the soil or earth. (Majumder, 2010)
The rapid rise in the population of West Bengal has not been accompanied by significant
economic growth. Key indicators such as unemployment rates, poverty rates, infant mortality
rates, job growth rates, per capita income, mobile phones penetration rates, lag the more
industrialized states of India. Local politicians gained power by promising agricultural land to
landless farmers, but given West Bengal's population density, the land-holdings are small and the
yields are insufficient to sustain poor families. While the shift from agriculture to industrial jobs
requires re-training, given India's economic growth, it provides an opportunity for earning higher
income. Several other states had offered land to Tata Motors for the project. The total investment
planned is to the tune of Rs 1,000crore The project had, however, generated controversy right
from the start, particularly on the question of state acquisition of fertile agricultural land for
private enterprise.
The people staying in the proposed land were forced to evacuate by the government. The
compensation given was considered inadequate and the new housing facilities offered were
delayed. This lead to the protest of the peasants backed by opposition political parties. The
company had made substantial promises. According to their claims, Singur would become a
mini-auto city and accordingly 70 vendors would set up shops along the factory. Right from the
start the project had generated controversy particularly on the question of state acquisition of
fertile agricultural land for private enterprise.
16




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


The Tata Motors site is the most fertile one in the whole of the Singur, and the Singur
block, in turn, is among the most highly fertile in West Bengal. Consequently, almost the entire
local population depends on agriculture with approximately 15000 making their livelihood
directly from it. With the number of direct jobs to be created no more than about 1,000, many of
which are expected to go to outsiders, the local populace felt threatened for their livelihood.

Environmental degradation is also feared.
Chief protesters include the opposition parties spearheaded by the Trinamool Congress
under Mamata Banerjee and Socialist Unity Centre of India. The movement has received
widespread support from civil rights and human rights groups, legal bodies, social activists
like Medha Patkar and Anuradha Talwar, Bookerprize-winning author Arundhati
Roy and Magsaysay and Jnanpith Award-winning author Mahasweta Devi. Other intellectuals,
writers like the poet Ruchit Shah, artists like Suvaprasanna, theatre and film personalities
like Saonli Mitra, Aparna Sen etc. have pitched in. The state police force has been used to restrict
their access to the area. The Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen supported the idea of factory but he
however opposed forcible acquisition of land. Preliminary surveys by officials of the state and
Tata Motors faced protests, and manhandling on one occasion, from the villagers organized
under the Save Singur Farmland Committee with Trinamool Congress forming its chief
component. (Wikipedia)
Lack of Planning
More than 60% of the farmers just knew two things i.e. their land is going to be taken
away and a factory is going to come up in its place, implying that they would die of
hunger and abject poverty.
There was practically no role played by the local panchayat toeducate the locals about
industrialization and its utilities.
17




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


There were hardly any presence of political workers who would take trouble of
explaining to the farmers the pros and cons of giving up land for industrial benefits and
which would help them in turn.
Extreme red-tapism and high levels of lethargy in the state bureaucracy created a huge
gap between the farmers and the planning department for the Singur project. According
to some reports the government officials also committed crime in dealing with the
agitated localites of Singur. Speaking to the Statesman about convicted IPS officer Mr.
Asit Paul, eminent writer and Magsaysay award winner, Mahasweta Devi said, He has
tortured farmers, assaulted women mercilessly. Mr Paul had assaulted women farmers
and Ms Anirudha Talwar, a human rights activist near the Singur factory for protesting
against land acquisition[1].
Most farmers being illiterate refused to sign documents that they did not understand. The
bureaucracy forced them to sign it. They did so grudgingly and hence a large amount of
discontent was initiated in the general public sentiment.
The opposition made use of this huge gulf between the government and the people and
extracted maximum political mileage out of it.
The procedure under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 was not followed fully and fairly.
The compensation was only monetary and no state level rehabilitation policy was
ordered.
The above arguments all point to one factor: Lack of planning. The high handedness of the
government proved to be the nemesis of this project even though the project would have actually
proven to be a gem in the Left Front governments industrial initiative. (Bhaumik, 2011)

18




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


On October 3, 2008, Ratan Tata declared his decision to move the Nano Project out of
West Bengal. Ratan Tata blamed agitation by Mamata Banerjee and her supporters for the
pullout decision. On 7 October 2008, the Tatas announced that they would be setting up the Tata
Nano plant in Sanand, Gujarat.
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND OF NANDIGRAM:
SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES
The basic idea of a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) is to create a small geographical
reserve a foreign territoryinside a country where a different set of rules will apply to
businesses. By offering less restrictive regulations, less burdensome tax or tariff regimes and a
blanks late for made-to-measure industrial parks, the zone is supposed to attract companies that
might not otherwise consider opening operations in the country, providing jobs and constructing
an export base.
In February 2005 the Indian Parliament passed the SEZ Act. Since then there has been a
rush of applicationsover 400from both domestic and foreign companies seeking to establish
SEZs all over the country. As of August 2007 a total of 234 SEZs have been approved, covering
an area of 0.34 lakh hectares. Another 162 have been given in-principle approval, for which as
much as 1.5 lakh hectare lands will be acquired.
SEZs are however under fire on many fronts. The main allegation is that farmers are
being forced to sell their land often at thrown away prices and lose their livelihoods, and that
State governments and corporate developers are profiteering. Critics also say that many of the
SEZs mooted may simply be property deals. Developers hope to acquire cheap land, put in a
minimum of infrastructure and sell it. Only 35% of the land area of a SEZ needs to be used for
industrial activities as per the SEZ Act. Even some within the industry think the incentives given
to units setting up SEZs are too generous. They include a 5-year holiday on profit tax, exemption
from import and excise duties and fewer licensing requirements. The fear of many economists is
that rather than promoting new business, the SEZs will merely attract investment that would
19




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


have arrived anyway. Instead of finding fresh sources of money for its infrastructure, India
would thereby have made things worse by depriving itself of tax revenue. While the CPI(M) has
opposed it at the national level and sought several amendments to the SEZ Act it has been an
enthusiastic champion of the concept in West Bengal, which became the first Indian State to
adopt the Act at the State level with similar provisions. The proposed10,000 acre SEZ in
Nandigram was part of a larger plan to set up a Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemical
Investment Region (PCPIR) around Haldia covering a total area of 62,500 acres.
WEST BENGAL
West Bengal is on the eastern bottleneck of India, stretching from the Himalayas in the
north to the Bay of Bengal in the south. The State has a total area of 88,752 square kilometres.10
West Bengal has a population of over 80 million.
The main players in the States politics are the political alliance known as the Left Front
led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPI(M) and includes the Communist Party of
India (CPI). Following the West Bengal State Assembly Elections in 2006, the Left Front
coalition under BuddhadebBhattacharjee of the CPI(M) was elected to power with an
overwhelming majority. West Bengal has been ruled by the Left Front for the past 30 years,
making it the worlds longest serving, democratically elected communist government.
NANDIGRAM
Nandigram is a rural area in East Medinipur district of West Bengal, which has been the
centre of peasant resistance against an attempt by the government to acquire agricultural land for
setting up a Special Economic Zone, as part of a larger plan for a chemical hub in the area. It is
located around 150 km from Kolkata, on the south bank of the Haldi River, opposite the
industrial city of Haldia. The area comes under the jurisdiction of the Haldia Development
Authority (HDA) for purposes of industrial development. Nandigram is divided into three
administrative blocks: Block 1, Block 2, Block 3,ofwhich Nandigram Block 1 will be most
affected if the West Bengal governments proposed SEZ project becomes a reality. The total area
20




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


of Nandigram (all 3 blocks) is 413.74 sq.km while the population is 439,077.11 The total area
earmarked for land acquisition as part of the proposed SEZ project is 10,000 acres.However this
land is home to a population of about 95,000 covering five Gram Panchayats. The main villages
in this area are Bhangabera, Sonachura, Saudhkhali, Maheshpur, Gokulnagar,
Adhikaripara.Muslims and lower caste Hindus dominate the population. Apart from agriculture,
the people of Nandigram are engaged as labourers in the garment industry and estuarine fishing.
Betel leaves represent the only commercial crop and brick kilns constitute the only industrial
activity. Nandigram also had a ship-repairing factory, Jellingham Project, set up in 1977,
occupying over 400 acres of land. Although 142 farming families lost their livelihood during the
land acquisition process at that time, only five got jobs in the factory but not for long as the
project stopped functioning just after five years. Most villages here have no electricity, few
pucca houses, and landholders subsist on three crops of rice and vegetables. Annual incomes
vary between Rs18,000 and Rs20,000.Many of Nandigrams youth travel up the river to the
industrial hub of Metiaburz to work in low-paid jobs in the garment and other industries.
Literacy rates here are 70 percent, though in some pockets they are as low as 27%, against West
Bengals average of 69%.


HOW IT ALL BEGAN
In 2005, a group of Non Resident Indians (NRIs) in the USA, holding senior professional
and business positions, showed interest in facilitating American foreign direct investment into
India, and selected chemicals and petrochemicals as a sector, which could attract such
investment. Following discussions with them, the Government of India accepted their suggestion
that the best way to attract foreign investment was to create high quality infrastructure. It was felt
that it was not enough to create modern infrastructure only within mega industrial estates, and
21




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


instead a whole region, comprising the industrial estates and the surrounding non-industrial area,
should be treated as an Investment Region.
The PCPIR Policy
Accordingly, Government of India adopted a policy to create Petroleum, Chemicals and
Petrochemicals Investment Regions (PCPIRs) in selected locations in India. In June 2006, the
NRI group arranged for presentations to be made by Government of India to American chemical
and petrochemical companies in the USA. The Chief Secretary, Government of West Bengal
made a presentation to the American companies highlighting investment opportunities in West
Bengal and the advantages that the State offers as a location for chemicals and petrochemicals
industries.
Main features of the PCPIRs include:
The area of the overall Investment Region should be about 250 sqkms, i.e., about62,500
acres. Out of this, only 40%,i.e., about 25,000 acres should be meant for industries. The
rest of the area will consist of existing towns, villages, settlements, agricultural land etc.
which will not come under industries.
Government of India will contribute to the infrastructure through construction of roads
and highways, railway links, port facilities, and telecommunications. State government
will contribute by facilitating power and water linkages. The development of
infrastructure inside the industrial areas, i.e., land development, internal roads, effluent
treatment, drainage and sewerage etc. will be done by private sector investment.

Response of West Bengal
22




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


The state government felt that selection of the Haldia region as a PCPIR and setting up
industrial estates in the form of SEZs within the PCPIR will attract significant manufacturing
investments and bring about growth and development in that area.
Moreover there will be major investment by Government of India for road and rail connectivity,
port facilities, and telecommunications. Therefore the State government decided to develop a
PCPIR around Haldia, with two SEZs, one fully dedicated to the chemicals industry, and the
other to be multi-product, i.e. chemicals as well as other industries. Given the essential
requirement of port facilities, it was felt that it is not possible to consider establishment of the
PCPIR in the interior parts of the State.
Location of the PCPIR
Given the large area required for the PCPIR it was seen that the areas around Haldia town
already had many industries and there were also natural constraints in developing additional port
facilities in Haldia. The choice of Nandigram Block 1 area therefore was felt to be suitable
because it also has the waterfront along the Hooghly River, and thus would provide scope for
extension of the port facilities on the riverside. Based on the above factors, the State government
decided to break up the approximately 25,000 acres required to be earmarked as manufacturing
zones under the PCPIR policy in two large SEZs, one of 12,500 acres in the Haldia side of Haldi
River, and another of 10,000 acres in the Nandigram side of Haldi River. This decision covered
only the general location of the mega industrial estates, and the exact
Quantum of land available was to be ascertained after local field level study and local
consultations.
Agreement for an Anchor Developer
In order to develop the industrial infrastructure inside the SEZs, the State government has
entered into an agreement with New Kolkata International Development Private Limited (NKID)
in July 2006. The NKID is a Consortium of the following companies:
23




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


(i)Bright Equity Group Limited, a company of The Salim Group of Indonesia; (ii)Universal
Success Enterprise Limited; and (iii)Unitech Limited of India.
LESSONS FROM KG-GAS BASIN
The use of gas in power-generation was initially promoted by the Government primarily
with a view to environmental considerations. Over 60% of Indias power generation is coal-
based but domestic coal supply is generally of low quality with low calorific values and a high
degree of ash content. Most of the gas-fired IPPs and large captive plants are located in the
Western Region, home of major domestic gas fields and large industrial complexes. Industrial
consumers are keen either to set up their own captive plants or to buy power directly from
private producers. For those large industrial power consumers quality and un-interrupted supply
are more relevant than price. Besides, given the typical power retail tariff structure in Indian
states with high cross-subsidies between different consumer groups, large industrial consumers
pay considerably more for power than their long-run marginal cost would suggest, thus, making
power purchases from gas-fired IPPs and gas-fired auto-production financially attractive - in
addition to providing the benefit of enhanced security and quality of supply.
A report published in 2004 by the Expert Committee on Fuels for Power Generation
under the aegis of the CEA took a different approach to assess the competitiveness of gas for
power generation. The expert committee analyzed various fuel options for varying distances
between the location of the fuel source and the load centres for base load (80% PLF) and peaking
plants (30% PLF). The study came to the conclusion that for base-load operations, domestically
supplied gas-fired plants located along the existing Hazira-Bijaipur-Jagdishpur (HBJ) pipeline
(connecting the north-western coast with the northern market) is the cheapest generation option
at all distances. Domestic-coal fired plants at pithead are the second cheapest option while
domestic coal-fired plants located close to demand-centres are ranked third.
Questions have been raised about the impact of the domestic gas finds on the demand-
supply scenario and if they might render gas imports uneconomical. None of the new domestic
24




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


gas finds are yet in production. Also, private investors like Reliance are authorized to sell gas at
market prices putting it in direct price competition with gas imports. Thus, even though domestic
gas supply will increase, gas price competitiveness in public power generation remains an issue.
Reliance is now planning to start production from their K-G field by mid 2008 with an
initial flow of around 5 bcm/y to be build gradually up to 13.5 bcm/y. The maximum flow from
Reliances K-G field could be 20.5bcm/y. GSPC announced that it expects to start commercial
production by end 2007 with an initial flow of 4 bcm/y to be increased to between 18-22 bcm/y
in 2010. The maximum flow from GSPCs field could be 29 bcm/y in 2017. However, none of
these production schedules and volumes is yet confirmed and further testing will need to be
undertaken. Questions also remain about the transport of the gas as there is currently no pipeline
that could transmit the gas cross-country. GAIL and Reliance have been in strong competition as
to who will build the pipeline to transmit gas from AP to demand centres at the west coast.
At the same time, the state government of Andhra Pradesh has announced its intention to
setup a gas pipeline grid in the state jointly with GAIL.
Assuming that the production from the K-G basin as well as from other recent discoveries
comes on stream as scheduled, and that gas flows from existing public fields decline as
projected, Indias total gas production could increase to about 51 bcm/y. Even in this optimistic
gas supply case there would still remain a demand-supply gap of around 25.5 bcm/y in 2012
leaving ample scope for gas imports. (International Energy Agency (IEA), Head of Publications
Service, 2005)
Legislative changes, restructuring and access arrangements are important components of
efforts directed towards improving the operation and efficiency of the natural gas industry. With
the use of natural gas forecast to increase substantially in the new millennium, structural changes
to present industry arrangements will enable increased competition and provide greater security
of supply of such an essential energy source.
The major aims of the restructuring process are fourfold:
25




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


1. To restructure the government owned gas businesses, leading to a break up of single entity
organisations into competing corporatized bodies. The Victorian Government has expressed
its intention to privatise the State owned gas assets, as it has with its electricity assets.
2. To increase competition both in the upstream and downstream sectors of the natural gas
industry in order to have both competing suppliers and retailers of natural gas.
3. To introduce regulatory controls over the natural monopoly components of the natural gas
businesses such as the operation of the transmission and distribution systems.
4. To implement a 'third party' access and regulatory regime in order that third parties that
explore for and develop gas fields can access existing processing facilities, together with
pipeline and distribution networks for agreed tariffs such that their gas can be marketed.
(Roarty, 1998)
From 2G to the recent coal scam, the CAG has pointed out the same underlying problem loss
to the public exchequer due to a policy of handing over precious natural resources on a first-come-
first-serve basis rather than being auctioned. Whether it is the 1.76 lakh crore (2G) or Rs 10.7 lakh
crore in the coal scam, the CAG has pointed out absence of transparent auctions as the reason for
massive losses.
The issue however is much deeper. The larger question is, can we arrest all losses to the state
exchequer merely by auctioning off resources to the highest bidder? Can it be in the national
interest to let private players use up and indiscriminately exhaust these precious resources as per
their whims and fancies merely for private profits, robbing future generations of Indian people of
these resources? Even if a resource like coal were to be auctioned off to a company, the state
receives a one-time payment or some miniscule royalty, which is a pittance of the total profit that it
finally makes from mining.
In the past few years, we have seen the oil and natural gas-rich Krishna Godavari (KG) basin
been handed over to Reliance for private profiteering. A previous CAG report has exposed how a
26




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


dubious production sharing contract was signed between the government and private petroleum
operators, data on Reliances capital expenditure was deliberately fudged and inflated, private
operators were allowed to sell oil at much higher rates than ONGC. Niira Radia tapes have also
told us how the UPA and the opposition NDA happily colluded on the floor of the Parliament to
award millions of rupees to Reliance as retrospective tax exemptions! therefore, the issue is NOT
merely one of reverting to the correct policy of auctioning natural resources.
Post-independence, coal was recognised as a national asset which the state should manage,
keeping in mind the interests of the community. Coal was thus nationalised a process that
began in 1971 and was completed in 1973. Soon afterwards however, the real project of
nationalisation began to unravel. As early as 1976, a clause was introduced in the Coal
Nationalisation Act to allow coal blocks to be allotted to private iron and steel (and in some limited
cases, to private power companies too) for their captive consumption.
The ongoing process of privatising coal mining proceeded with great speed in the 1990s the
Coal Nationalisation Act was amended in 1993 to allow allotment of captive coal mining blocks to
private power companies. Coal prices were deregulated by the Ministry of Coal, and in 1996, the
MoC issued yet another notification allowing cement companies to acquire captive coal mining
blocks.
And as the CAG report now exposes, between 2004-2009, coal mining blocks were handed out
on a platter at a pittance to private companies who mine coal as and when they can make the most
profits. When the issue of allotting coal blocks at ridiculously low rates became too difficult for the
UPA to handle, they finally introduced the new MMDR Act 2011, which recommends auctioning
of coal blocks.
Besides this hyper-active neo-liberal policy shift favouring corporate profits, we are also
witnessing how the state machinery sits back and watches rampant violations and open loot of
mineral resources by the politician-mafia nexus from Bellary in Karnataka, to the coal belt in
Chhattisgarh and MP, to mineral-rich areas in Odisha and Jharkhand.
27




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


Also, this time around the PMO cannot even pretend (as it tried to do in the 2G scam) not to be
involved. After all, coal ministry was directly under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for long
stretches during 2004-2009 when these dubious allocation of coal blocks took place and therefore
complicit in this loss of resources. Several of the companies named in the draft CAG report that is
causing such a furore are based in BJP-ruled Chhattisgarh. It is clear that after all the public sound
and fury, the so-called opposition BJP will also willingly participate in a carefully orchestrated
cover-up in order to hide the huge share they enjoy in this regime of corporate loot. So whether the
so-called opposition NDA-BJP chooses to raise the issue or not, whether the CAG chooses to
backtrack on its own draft estimates or not, the dubious nature of allocation of coal blocks and the
obvious possibility of mega corruption involved in the process CANNOT be brushed under the
carpet ANYMORE.
In designing a mineral policy for the entire country, it is important to ask: will state policy be
decided by corporate profits, or by the larger interests of the people? In the case of an important
resource like coal, why should public sector companies have to engage in cut-throat competition
with the likes of the Jindals and the Tatas? Why should private companies be allotted captive coal
mining blocks? Why cant they simply purchase all the coal they require from Coal India, instead
of acquiring coal blocks and then using them as speculative capital to profit from? The use of
natural resources as tools for corporate profiteering must be put an end to. (AISA, 2013)
LESSONS FROM NANDIGRAM
Those killed in violence in Nandigram in West Bengal's Purbo Medinipur district even
before the dust had settled at Singur in adjoining Hooghly district were not just the first
casualties in the State of group clashes over the acquisition of land for prospective industry. There
were, disturbingly, also victims of a seemingly well-orchestrated campaign claiming that the local
peasants were on the verge of losing their lands to a government bent on bull-dozing through its
plans for greater industrialization in the State, without a care for their concerns.
28




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


The campaign, aimed at inflaming passions by stoking apprehensions among the villagers over
the fate of their lands as well as their future, took off in both Singur and Nandigram. It is now
threatening to spread to fresh areas elsewhere in south Bengal, identified as potential sites for
industry.
Though the core issue at hand that of acquisition of farmland both at Singur and
Nandigram is the same, the strategies employed by those behind the movements have been
different as has been their rhetoric.
At Singur, leaders of the Singur Krishi Jamin Raksha (Save Farmland) Committee while
fudging data and contradicting official estimates to drive home their point that much of the land
required for Tata Motors proposed car manufacturing plant had been acquired without the
consent of the owners pegged their protests to the demand that the land be returned.
At Nandigram, the Bhoomi Ucched Pratirodh (Resistance to Land Acquisition) Committee
has played on the fears of the local people, warning them that the acquisition of their lands was
imminent and that the notices to do so had been issued. This despite the State authorities
repeatedly pointing out that a final identification of the land to be acquired for the proposed
special economic zone to be set up there by the Indonesian Salim Group was nowhere close to
being finalized.
Cause for concern:
What has added to the anxieties of the West Bengal Government is that those behind the
protests at Nandigram include a distinctly religious-political grouping, the Jamait-e-Ulema Hind.
This, it is feared, is imparting communal overtones to events unfolding there. Understandably,
Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee has expressed concern over this development. Added to
this are reports of a large number of activists and strategists belonging to different ultra-Left
Naxalite factions converging in the area over the past weeks from areas beyond the State's
borders. This is like what those belonging to militant Maoist outfits have been doing in the
south-western parts of the State, which have seen subversive activity in recent times.
29




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


That the increasingly dominant role of those Naxalite organizations in the anti-land
acquisition movement at Singur has been cause for chagrin for a section of leaders of the
mainstream Opposition parties that had banded together on the issue is another story. There can
be little denying that those behind the protests at both Singur and Nandigram are out to stonewall
the State Government's plans for industrial growth. The claim of parties like the Trinamool
Congress and the Congress that they are not against industrialization as long as it does not
impinge on agricultural land does not hold good in the light of the facts on the existing land use
pattern of the State.
The share of fallow, uncultivable land and pastures constitute only one per cent of the
total land in a State whose net sown area is nearly 63 per cent 46 per cent being the national
average and which is, according to a recently published status-on-land report by the West
Bengal Government, "characterized by its intensiveness. Neither have the leaderships behind
the movements at Nandigram and Singur shown any inclination to sort out their misgivings
through discussions with the State Government. This despite repeated requests from the Chief
Minister to do so.
Asking them to desist from precipitating a situation that could turn volatile and lead to
violence as it turned out at Nandigram Mr. Bhattacharjee has been reiterating that he is
willing to discuss the "entire gamut of issues related to land acquisition for industry" as well as
his Government's future industrial plans. So far the appeal has fallen on deaf ears. In such a
situation, perhaps it is in the fitness of things that the State Government has decided to make
public its views on the subject, particularly in view of the immense possibilities for the facts
getting twisted to suit political ends. It is set to announce a comprehensive SEZ policy for West
Bengal, which will exclude multi-crop farmland, homestead areas, places of worship, and
graveyards. It will delineate the sites to be chosen for the creation of such zones and will also
include a compensation package not simply confined to cash for those whose lands might
need to be acquired.
30




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


This could help the Left Front counter the campaign that has travelled to Singur and
Nandigram and seems well on its way to other areas, the route being determined by West
Bengal's road map for industrial resurgence. (Marcus, 2007)
In short, it could be said that the government is very much interested in wooing investors
by providing them cheap land at the cost of its farmers (who are drastically affected the fall in
their Human Capital)But, still the government is constantly reminded that even if a sizeable
minority perceives that industrialization is going to hurt them, then it will be impossible for the
government to carry it out. And the incidents like Nandigram and Singur must act as an eye-
opener for the policy-makers. (Basu, 2007)

Bibliography
(2007). Retrieved from wikipedia.
(2012). Retrieved from www.myeconomist.wordpress.com.
AISA. (2013, October 25). All India Students' Association. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from www.aisa.in:
http://www.aisa.in/kg-basin-to-coal-gate-neo-liberalism-and-corporate-loot-of-natural-resources/
Arvind Kejriwal targets RILs Mukesh Ambani, orders FIR on gas pricing. (2012, March). Retrieved from
www.livemint.com: http://www.livemint.com/Companies/RppY7AaSuZoVETyYRhbfIJ/Arvind-Kejriwal-
orders-FIR-against-RILs-Mukesh-Ambani-over.html
Basu, N. (2007). Singur, Nandigram And Industrialisation Of West Bengal. People's Democracy .
Bhaumik, S. (2011, April 16). The Singur Controversy: A Causal Analysis. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from
Mightylaws.in: http://www.mightylaws.in/450/singur-controversy-causal-analysis
Directorate General of Hydrocarbons. (2011). Krishna-Godavari Basin.
International Energy Agency (IEA), Head of Publications Service. (2005). Gas -Fired Power Generation in
India. Paris: International Energy Agency (IEA), Head of Publications Service.
Investopedia. (2014). Retrieved from Investopedia:
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDw
31




This document is authorised to use only by L.Lewis at Institute of fundamental researches, New Guinea until
November 2014.Copying or pasting is an infringement of copyright.


QFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investopedia.com%2Fterms%2Fp%2Fprivatization.asp&ei=E6kqU-
fqJISCrgfP8ICoAw&usg=AFQjCNEW_0sfq_u3SaHa8siH4jDCB9p39g&bvm=bv.62922401,d.bmk
Investopedia. (2014). Retrieved from Investopedia:
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CC4Q
FjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.investopedia.com%2Fterms%2Fc%2Fcoporatization.asp&ei=16sqU7_lO
I6RrAebiYHQCg&usg=AFQjCNFp3gGkKKHTfsNZ481U6dWeUSPCLw&bvm=bv.62922401,d.bmk
KmHouseIndia. (n.d.). Reliance KG Basin Gas Pricing Controversy .
Majumder, S. (2010, November). Majumder: The Nano Controversy. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from
WWW.ICAINSTITUTE.ORG: http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/jekem/vol2/iss1/5/
Marcus, D. (2007). Singur to Nandigram and beyond. The Hindu .
Myeconomist. (2011). K-G BASIN MUKESH AMBANI SCAM .
NCERT. (n.d.). Indian economic development. NCERT.
Roarty, M. (1998). Natural Gas: Energy for the new millenium. Australia: Environment & Resources
Group.
Wikipedia. (2014). Retrieved from Wikipedia:
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQ
FjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPrivatization&ei=E6kqU-
fqJISCrgfP8ICoAw&usg=AFQjCNGcJaFOp0fKOzSvNdHpovz5Xo65fQ
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Krishna Godavari Basin. Krishna Godavari Basin Discoveries .
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Singur Tata Nano controversy. Retrieved march 19, 2014, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singur_Tata_Nano_controversy